Share this article



Reader Comments (35)

Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer


William Cartwright
1 Posted 20/07/2018 at 17:48:38
Good commercial analysis, Michael, and asks more questions than it answers. It is an accountant's perspective, nothing wrong with that, but it is so difficult to establish a well balanced egalitarian structure where each player is rewarded on his merits. How can Williams be paid more than Baines, for example, to any right minded person?

Money is the base of all the activities. Now, with the reins rightly being pulled in, I am waiting to see the measure of patience which supporters will give to M+M. This must be the real key. Also the negative mind-set running within if not through the Club may still be eating away at the morale of the squad. I wonder how successful the background management restructuring will help?

Back to the squad issues, it has been said so many times that the abject failure of the Koeman & Walsh performance, coming on top of Martinez's loss of reality in his last 2 seasons has really knocked the Club for six.

Allardyce's tenure was more successful for the Club than I think we realize. It brought home to all of us a) the importance of Premier League survival 'at all costs' and b) the realization that negative, defensive and fearful footy will not work long term, just like trying to buy success (unless you have squillions to spend without a profitable return.

The four crap consecutive seasons took their toll on the mentality and progress of some players in their prime, and some past it and just sliding down into retirement, but they taught many of us a lesson. Now we need to balance the books, be sustainable and also very patient.

Youth as Brands doctrine is the only way forward. I just hope it will work as the Big 6 will continue to spend and spend, whilst simultaneously bringing in some youth development products of their own, so we are really up against it trying to crash to party.

Both Marcel and Marco have to be at the top of their game as well as having to complement and dovetail their activities and get the balance right. Plus, a lot of luck is always needed.

COYB!

Ash Moore
2 Posted 20/07/2018 at 18:24:30
It really looks like Moshiri has decided to amortize last years disaster over two years. That could be the case but I believe – hope? – there are funds available for the "right" players.

Unfortunately those players almost certainly don't want to turn out for a club with no European football and their third gaffer in a year. How many superstar players' agents would tell their clients coming to Goodison is a good career move? This club has lost a lot of credibility in the last few years, probably since Martinez and Eto'o had a massive bust-up. We're now paying some of the price of that.

Brands has made a positive impression on me; he's already fronted the fans and media more than that gobshite Walsh did. But you also have to figure he got the job by telling Moshiri how much Everton wouldn't spend – at least initially. It was over hopeful to expect a real round of recruitment, particularly with our current amount of leverage. (Premier League status and stupid wages.) But without at least some defensive additions the fans are right to be concerned.

Unfortunately, as other posters have noted, we are almost certainly fucked this year as the "rebuild" or the "process" goes along. Anyone who said Champions League last season hang your head in shame. The sound you heard last season was not the window being opened, but it actually slamming shut and being triple locked to boot. We've no young blue chip players left to sell and the owner has actually now realised that you can lose real skin in this game.

If Marco can't get a tune out of this lot quickly you fear where it might end. Moshiri might have to spend just to keep us afloat, in which case I can see him getting out fast. It's that bad.

Michael – correct me if I'm wrong, don't the players have a union which prohibits buyouts for less than full contract value? That was my understanding?

Michael Morgan
3 Posted 20/07/2018 at 01:42:08
Thanks, William and Ash, for hearing opinions other fans have.

Both of you mentioned the negative effects of going through several managers in such a short space of time, which I totally agree on. As with all new managers, they are normally backed to invest in new players, tactics, training etc. For that to have happened 3 times within a season, I have no doubt in my mind that it impacted player morale and angered fans who were optimistic at the start of last season.

I'd personally tie in the increase in squad size to going through 4 managers in just over 2 seasons. I mean Martinez had his squad and system; once Koeman arrived, he would of instilled his methods and brought in who he thought would improve the team. All of a sudden, one or more of the better players under Martinez is ostracized by Koeman as he doesn't fit his style. Them players lose their place, form, value drops, making it harder to move on. Multiply that by a further 2 managers and your original squad of 28 is now 38.

I also couple that opinion with the transfer strategies in place during each manager. Martinez seemed to have a mixed policy of youth and experience; Koeman sided more on experience but still bought youth and Allardyce was solely experience.

Now, with Silva and Brands, it looks like it's back to a healthier mix with recruitment looking at youth but with some experience of first team action.

I think in some part that the whole club has lost its identity, right the way through from owner to players. Now is definitely time to give support and patience to them.

I definitely think support will help improve squad morale which will lead to better player and manager performances, which will bring back that stability that we desperately need.

2-3 seasons of poor management definitely won't be resolved within 1-2 windows and a handful of games. I just hope fans realise that it may take more than a year to be challenging for European places again.

COYB

ps: Ash, I'm not sure about you're player union question; I will do a bit of research to see if I can find out more about it, or hopefully someone on here with more knowledge on it can help answer.

Michael Morgan
4 Posted 21/07/2018 at 15:42:56
Ash,

Reference your question yesterday, I did some digging and found this news article from 3 days ago:

Link

Couldn't find official rules or laws regarding matter, but it looks like if it's mutual consent, then it's allowed.

Dave Abrahams
5 Posted 21/07/2018 at 16:06:16
Michael.

Thank you for that financial run down, very interesting. I'm not picking on one player because some of the contracts and wages are absolutely staggering, but how, in God's name, did Martina get a 3-year contract at £35,000 per week?!? He must have some agent to go alongside some of the most stupidest people in charge of the club, giving these contracts out.

Michael Morgan
6 Posted 21/07/2018 at 17:50:36
Thanks Dave (#5),

I think our transfer policy over past few years has shown weakness and reeks of desperation.

I could name several like Martina:

1. Sandro Ramirez £65k a week on a 4 year contract.

We have several players with a combined wage salary of less than what Sandro is on.

- Dominic Calvert-Lewin £12k a week has 5 years left

- Tom Davies £25k a week has 4 years left

- Mason Holgate £7k a week has 2 years left

- Kieran Dowell £5k a week has 1 year left

- Jonjoe Kenny £3k a week has 4 years left

- Beni Baningime £2k a week has 4 years left

6 players wages added together is £54.5k a week, £10.5k less than just 1 player. You could probably extend Holgate and Dowell's contracts and it would still be less.

Not counting Sandro's previous performances at other clubs, just basing performances for Everton and including the above 6 mentioned players performances for Everton. My opinion is that all 6 players have performed better than he has.

2. Davy Klaassen £70k a week on a 5-year contract.

- Idrissa Gueye £45k a week has 4 years left

- Ademola Lookman £23k a week has 3 years left

Both players combined, cost less to buy and have a combined wage £2k less than Klaassen.

3. Henry Onyekuru £31k a week on a 5-year contract.

This one, not so much on wages due to the fact that his wages have probably been covered in loan deals. But paying for a player for 5 years and him not even kicking a ball for us for at least 2 years is ludicrous.

Steve Ferns
7 Posted 21/07/2018 at 18:02:54
Nice one for the mods making this worthy of a thread in its own right.

On the subject of cancelling or buying out the contract, there’s no hard and fast rules. As everything contract related the contract itself usually sets the rules. The law says that unless the contract says otherwise, you can’t cancel, buyout or terminate the contract. In other words, Ashley Williams is due every penny the contract says he is owed and in return he just needs to attend training unless injured and make himself available for selection.

Where people do cancel contracts, it’s usually because the club gives the player a good reason to do so, ie pay Williams half of what he’s owed and allow him to find a new club and get a new contract.

To be fair to Steve Walsh, for it is he who gave Sandro that ridiculous contract, we picked Sandro up for a bargain fee, or so everyone thought at the time. Other clubs came in for him and so we offered him bumper wages justifying it by the limited level of expenditure on the transfer fee.

The other players you mention all came through the academy or where bought as youths and so were on low wages.

Walsh was a scout and got things wrong as he had no idea how to build a squad. Brands is hopefully better and his moves will be made with a long term strategy in mind.

Gavin Johnson
8 Posted 21/07/2018 at 18:08:53
My only thought after reading this is that we need to get Kieran Dowell on a new deal if he's in the last year of his contract.
Steve Ferns
9 Posted 21/07/2018 at 18:10:50
That's a tough one, Gavin. We need to avoid what's above. Dowell will want a long-term deal on a decent wage and guarantees over first-team football.

Brands will need to be careful here not to get fleeced and not to force the player to look elsewhere.

Gavin Johnson
10 Posted 21/07/2018 at 18:18:27
True, Steve, but I don't see Kieran (or agent) causing much trouble. I don't see us getting stuck with Kieran on a Luke Garbutt type contract. He looks like he'll be a useful player for us for many years and he'd have plenty of suitors if we chose to sell him down the line.

That said, I thought Garbutt looked a tremendous prospect. I guess the difference is that Dowell shone out in the Championship. Something Garbutt has never been able to do.

Steve Ferns
11 Posted 21/07/2018 at 18:32:49
Gavin, you forget that Luke Garbutt got his contract when it looked like he was capable of being the new Leighton Baines, following a string of strong performances for the first team in the Premier League. As the old Leighton Baines was not so old, he got his place back and Garbutt, we all know, was sent on loan and his career went downhill fast.

So Dowell is not at the same level as Garbutt was when he got his deal. As I said it's a real tricky one, and if Dowell gets a bumper new deal on Garbutt money, well he needs a defined plan for career progression which will mean plenty of games for the first team.

I'd also be reluctant to loan out Dowell and Vlasic. They need exposure to Silva and his coaching. Is ten games in the championship better than one sub appearance in the Premier League and training with and competing with the first team? I think again it's a difficult balancing act.

Significantly reducing the squad size so players like Dowell and Vlasic come straight in with injuries is needed.

Mark Taylor
12 Posted 21/07/2018 at 18:41:36
Michael

Not sure what your source is but my understanding is that Klaassen and Sandro are on a lot more than you suggest:

Link

Obviously this stuff is open to some conjecture because it is supposed to be reasonably private, but I've certainly seen the figures in that link corroborated- namely that both are on in excess of £100k, Sandro on £120k. Not a guy you can afford to have fail — neither of them in fact...

Michael Morgan
13 Posted 21/07/2018 at 19:09:33
Hi Mark #12,

When researching player salaries, I managed to find 2 sites showing player weekly earnings. One of them was the site you linked in your post, the other was this:

Link

I went with lower amounts as to not overprice the annual budget in case I was wrong. As as you mentioned due to its private nature it was hard to find concrete official figures.

Jay Wood
[BRZ]

14 Posted 21/07/2018 at 19:11:08
I don't wish to cast aspersions on Michael's numbers, but I would be interested to know the source of the listed players' salaries.

I thought it was nigh on impossible to determine to any degree of accuracy the likely salary of individual players from the released club accounts, beyond seeing the overall gross number for all players.

Aren't any sites claiming to report club salaries just 'guestimates' and not based on any hard evidence?

Steve Ferns
15 Posted 21/07/2018 at 19:20:27
No hard evidence, Jay. Players salaries are not required to be disclosed. We do have to disclose the wage bill as a whole, which was £130M in the last set of accounts and that's the figure we need to reduce. I believe we are not selling to buy, we just need to balance the balance sheet.
Gavin Johnson
16 Posted 21/07/2018 at 19:21:42
I'm not sure about that Steve. Yes, Garbutt played a handful of games while Baines was injured but weren't a couple of them dead rubber Uefa Cup games?? So yes, it could be argued a higher level, but Dowell played well for Forest for the most part of last season, and got goals and assists.

The fact that he did the business at that level means they'd be plenty of takers if we chose to sell further down the line. Kieran Dowell is a player we have to keep, even if it's for resale value like we seem to have done by giving Pennington a deal. Pennington's a player who will never make it at Everton.

Steve Ferns
17 Posted 21/07/2018 at 19:25:32
Garbutt played 12 games when he got his deal. Only 5 were in the league. Point was his stock was high and he got a deal he shouldn’t have got as people were scared of losing him.
James Flynn
18 Posted 21/07/2018 at 21:15:02
Garbutt was all potential. It wasn't signing him for another few years a problem. It was his lazy ass not trying to improve his all-round game.

In his prime, part of a Moyes-disciplined defense, Baines was never a great defender. But as good a defender he could be, he was, because he put in the work.

Garbutt's done nothing. I'd guess he'll spend the rest of his contract, out on loan, continuing to do nothing bur collect his paycheck.

I don't begrudge any player the wages they're signed on for. The money's there. I'd sure take it. But when they won't keep working to improve their game? I hate that.

Michael Morgan
19 Posted 22/07/2018 at 04:55:23
Jay (#14),

You're correct about finding exact first team player salaries online as the 2 sites I found listing salaries didn't take into account bonuses of each individual player, only basic wages.

I did investigate a little more though, and if you click on the link below, and scroll down the page, you will see a list of reports dating as far back as 2003 all the way to 2017:

Link

The last report dated December 2017 shows the official annual profit/loss report.

If you click on that and scroll down to page 58, it shows turnover and operating expenses for 2016 and 2017:

2016

Turnover was £121,541,000
Expenses was £149,988,000

2017

Turnover was £171,330,000
Expenses was £183,632,000

That's 2 years on the bounce that we've operated at a loss and I'm guessing that this year will be a loss too due to player acquisitions in January and going through another manager.

This brings me back to original post about needing stability as we can't keep going through managers like we have and the spending sprees that go with them.

I'm worried that if we keep operating at a loss, sooner or later, Moshiri will get annoyed and jump ship.

Going back to the report, if you scroll down to page 61, you'll see wages and salaries for 2016 and 2017:

2016 was £73,914,000
2017 was £92,144,000

Now I know that that's all players and staff involved with EFC, but I'm guessing my original quote of £77,870,000 for the first team isn't far off.

Victor Yu
20 Posted 22/07/2018 at 06:36:10
There were a couple of promoted teams looking to sign Garbutt at the time. So we decided to match the offer and keep him at Goodison. He would have signed for half of that (that's what was reported) if we had offered him a contract half a year before that.
Paul Birmingham
21 Posted 22/07/2018 at 09:45:45
Excellent read and perhaps this level of detail on players contracts and total cost of ownership will be undertaken by Marcel Brands. It's not good reading and shows in my view a lack of any cohesion with the club's management structure — not just the last 4 years but the last 20 years.

The club is now rebuilding its structure and on the field, the price will be paid until there is a consistent policy. I'd hate to think what would happen if Moshiri decided to do one. Perhaps Usmanov will join ranks in due course.

Looking at the trading model and wages, getting shut for the best price sounds obvious, but the stock value of some of these players means the club is gonna be lucky to give them away, hence the contracts will be run down...

After last night's game, I reckon that the next few years are going to test the will and mindset of all Evertonians.

I sense also Bramley-Moore Dock, for now is parked and in suspension until further notice.

I'm probably miles off on all accounts, but that's how it seems to me at this moment. Hope eternal but being realistic.

A centre-forward, left-back, and centre-back... and a creative Arteta-type midfielder... gonna be tough to get in the 3 weeks of the transfer window that's left.

Rob Dolby
22 Posted 22/07/2018 at 10:36:31
Great OP which raises the question of why do we need to trim the squad size if the so called big boys have similar sized squads?

Natural wastage will trim the squad with older players whilst younger players will either be moved on or loaned out.

Our issue is quality over quantity. We lack quality in most positions.
Pickford,Coleman,Baines,Jags,Walcott,Siggurdsson pick themselves the rest are making the numbers up.

Of the players highlighted we need to keep Baines, Jags, Stek and Niasse as we don't have quality pushing them out. Dowell and Holdgate have potential to be quality first teamers whilst McCarthy would walk into the team if fit, I know it's a big if but worth keeping hold of.

The rest are fringe players who haven't convinced me that they have the quality to make the next step up.

Chris James
23 Posted 22/07/2018 at 14:13:36
This is a brilliant post Michael, focusing as much as possible on observable facts rather than the relentless moaning and armchair fantasy football we more often get.

I think it also illustrates that the situation isn't quite as awful as portrayed. If Baines, Jags and Williams are on their last legs but can help to deputise and offer experience to their replacements then being on the last year of contract is surely not the end of the world?

Yes we need to shift more on, but to be fair the management is steadily trying to do this, no?
Dropping Rooney's wages off the bill will have helped tremendously as he was without doubt the biggest earner, Funes Mori and Robles presumably were also non-players on a respectable wage so that's all chipping away.
Clearly the club has been very keen to offload the likes of Klassen, Bolasie and Sandro on loan deals too - the fact that the players/clubs have dropped out of these deals can't really be on the head of the new FD or manager but have to be down to poor purchasing by the previous administration.

Although to be fair to Koeman I think there's a lot of wisdom in hindsight going in here. I don't recall too many dissenting voices when we picked up 8 players early on at the start of last season including some sought after talent (Pickford, Keane, Siggy), some seemingly safe choices elsewhere (Rooney, Bolasie and Klassen) and a couple of 'cheap' prospects (Ramirez and Vlasic).
Indeed the most dissenting voices I recall from ToffeeWeb related to Cuco Martina (who's flawed by has arguably provided more value than any other player in terms of minutes per £) and the price paid for Siggy.

In a similar vein, there weren't too many complaints when we first acquired Ashley Williams or Schneiderlein either that I can recall - both of whom had performed well enough in the league at previous clubs) and we need to recall RK was also in the setup that brought in Gueye, Lookman, Calvert-Lewin and a chunk of other youth prospects who have done pretty well in Under 23s (although not subsequently giving some of these a first team chance is slightly mystifying). Also RK did offload a load of squad players who weren't playing/making it (Cleverly, Oviedo, Gibson, Deulofeu...)

What's my point?
I guess it's that getting the transfer market right is a tough game and one which its almost impossible to 'win' at. If you're super picky and don't buy players the fans shout you down for not investing or dithering, if you push on decisively and it doesn't work then either you're panic buying or settling.

For me the real problem here (as in most of football) is the clash between short-term demands and long term thinking/planning. Players (especially foreign prospects/younger ones) can't be acquired on the basis of a 12 month contract, you need to plan ahead and look at how the team can evolve together over time and accept that not everything can be done at once.
We also need to accept that we're up against very stuff opposition - we don't naturally 'belong' in the top 4 or even 6, we should aspire to that and we do/have but not every team can win immediately, again this speaks towards patient approach and longer-term thinking (as perhaps were seeing at Spurs and certainly saw at City who's current success is built not just on ££, but also a decade or so of investment and improvement).

As a final parting note I'd like to state for the record how impressive Moyes' tenure appears and illustrate his record as an example of consistency and building. Admittedly the financial levels may not have been quite as ludicrous as they are today, but he spent next to nothing and managed to build a progressively improving quality of players and a team spirit that feels to have been lost in the ensuing years.

Simon Smith
24 Posted 22/07/2018 at 17:01:28
On the above two lists, I'd only keep Niasse, Holgate and Dowell, although I'd want a fee for McCarthy so he might need a new deal. I'd also like to see Galloway given a chance before being moved on.

Jagielka and Baines are both very loyal servants but both are near the tail-end of there career, they could both be moved out and save the club a fortune.

Williams, Mirallas, Martina, Klaassen, Sandro and Bolasie all need swerving asap, binning them would save us around £400k a week (£5M pa).

Lots of deadwood need clearing out; Koeman cleared out a lot of crap but unfortunately he bought replacement shite and put them on more money.

Somewhere in the region of 15 players need selling off, that's going to take time, more than one window.

Michael Morgan
25 Posted 22/07/2018 at 18:48:09
Paul (#21), Rob (#22) and Chris (#23),

Thanks for your kind words on the article, and adding your own fresh insight into this debate.

I agree a lot with what you mentioned and I see a pattern between the 3 posts and what I originally wrote that if we didn't extend any of the 15 players that are within last 2 years of contract, that we would naturally reduce the squad by nearly 43%.

I honestly think that over the next 2 years, that we might have to bite the bullet and live with our mistakes.

That being said we can't just stop investment for 2 years whilst the squad naturally reduces. Their has to be a balanced way forward.

Another question I wanted to add since reading the annual report is that their is an expense called:

Amortization of players registrations, and in 2017 the expense for the year was £37,298,000, it is on page 58 of the report.

I have tried to find more info on this and found the 2 articles linked below:

Link

Link

Is this how transfer fees incoming and outgoing are accounted for? Say a player is bought for £40 million on a 4-year contract, do we pay £10 million a year to the selling club for 4 years or do we pay the full amount of £40 million and we account for it by breaking it down into a yearly cost over the entirety of the contract?

I'm hoping someone could help explain this a little better for me please?


Chris James
26 Posted 22/07/2018 at 19:26:00
In many (but not all) transfers, I think that, yes, the player transfer fee is amortised across the length of the contract.
Mark Taylor
27 Posted 23/07/2018 at 01:29:33
Michael 25

That is my understanding of how we and most clubs account for transfer spending. Essentially you have an accounting issue and of course a cashflow issue- the two are obviously not the same.

It means under player trading, we would have booked a huge profit for Lukaku. Same, but to a lesser extent for the Barkely transfer. It also means that of all the players we have bought in the past couple of years, probably only Pickford would be sellable for in excess of his depreciated value.

The other side of it is your topic, wages. As Brands has said, the problem with buying players in the EPL is that you invariably end up paying a wage that is far excess of what almost all other clubs globally will pay, or even could afford to pay, and if the player does not work out, that is doubly so. It's a small market to move such players onto. Brands himself reckons you need close to a 90 per cent hit rate. I think that is a bit ambitious, but equally we are clearly well below 0 per cent in recent years.

Ironically, you would have players like Besic and Funes Mori who we can best make a turn from. Lowish wages- even a Championship club might be able to afford Besic- but whose depreciated values are fairly low so even if the fee isn't that much, it still gives a decent profit in the player trading account. It might also explain why selling Lookman looks attractive. RB Leipzig can certainly afford to increase his wages and still give us a decent fee, which will also kick a fair size profit into player trading.

Not that I think that would be a good idea, especially if it means having to pay even more for the likes of Richardson, who to my mind is no more proven, plus I suspect very substantial wages given he comes from another EPL club.

David Ellis
28 Posted 23/07/2018 at 03:29:08
David Ellis
29 Posted 23/07/2018 at 03:30:08
Michael,

Great series of posts – nice to discuss some actual facts. Having said that, the "natural wastage" over the next two years will only bring the squad size down if we don't offer any new contracts in the meantime. Which we will – both to new players coming in (likely to be at least 3: Richarlison, Digne and Mina), and also to new contracts to emerging talent as they emerge from the U18s/U23s.

It will take at least 3 more years to clear this up. By then, players like Klaassen and Sandro will be close to the end of their contracts so the cost of their contracts will start to fall below their value in the transfer market, meaning there is a chance to get rid of them early; presumably also by then they will be so bored (and rich) they will move just to get a game.

Of course, that assumes we haven't signed any other deadbeats on massive contracts... which of course we will, but hopefully fewer this time around.

Kevin Prytherch
30 Posted 23/07/2018 at 07:27:42
Out of everything in the thread, and looking at preseason, the most alarming point is that Dowell only has 1 year left on his contract.
Eric Myles
31 Posted 23/07/2018 at 09:21:41
Michael (#25), sometimes a club will pay the transfer fee on the drip; sometimes they will pay the fee in full. If in full, then it's amortised across the length of the player's contract. I don't know how it's handled if paid on the drip.

Amortisation is one of the "dark arts" of accountancy. For example, remember Robinho who Man City bought for £32 mill and sold 2 years later for £16 mill? Well in their books the year he was sold Man City recorded a profit on his sale.

How? Amortisation!

Eric Myles
32 Posted 23/07/2018 at 09:24:23
I see one of your links deals with the Robinho transfer, sorry, I didn't read it first.
Chris James
33 Posted 23/07/2018 at 18:59:14
Sounds like we might even be able to move Klassen on to Dortmund...happy days if so.
Paul Bernard
34 Posted 24/07/2018 at 09:35:48
I have had this wage bill discussion with my granddad for a few years now. His old accountant used to tell him how teams like Man Utd and Real Madrid used sponsorship and entertaining corporate members to boost revenue (this conversation started about 15 years ago!). United and Ferguson, Madrid and Perez, were well ahead of their time, even Wenger pushing the emphasis on the Emirates build was a shrewd move.

I mention the above because they maximised sponsorship deals and stadium facilities to generate revenue to cover and increase their wage bill amongst other aspects of running a multi-million pound empire. Any other income such as TV deals is pure gravy (money to spend). Throw in a couple of wealthy owners and they are almost untouchable.

That is were Everton faltered – growing their brand. As we won titles and cups in our prime, we didn't realise the marketing opportunities that would change the face of football; United and Madrid did.

Fast forward 20 years and we truly see how far we have fell behind, our restricted wage budget is the result of playing catch up. As we are so far behind, we basically needed someone like Moshiri to come in and say that any income generated is for running the club – he'll pay for the players. His efforts last season was to fast track us up the table, well that backfired!

Now we have a squad of players who are on mega deals and some are past their prime. Sandro is rumoured to be on £100k a week, Klaassen is about £120k, Williams £60-75k, Baines and Jags are on more than the £50k suggested. So unless M&M can coach these players (especially Davy and Sandro) then we are severely restricted by the wage bill. We have also lost a small slice in revenue from failing to qualify for Europe.

My only suggestion right now would be to continue the clear out by any means necessary, promote Holgate, Dowell, Davies and Lookman to more important positions within the squad. This season may be a case of starting from the bottom; the new management team needs patience and support.

Denis Richardson
35 Posted 24/07/2018 at 15:14:43
Micheal - you have listed out and succinctly highlighted the unfortunate shite we're in.

We have a massive wage bill loaded with high earning very average earners. I.e. a lot of over paid players who as a result will be hard to shift, unless we at least carry on paying part of their wages. Most footballers are motivated by money, a lot don't even like the sport that much and consider it just a job and go through the motions, so a fair few will sit tight unless another sucker fancies paying them huge wages. Not their fault at a the end of the day, we were stupid enough to offer the contracts.

So, onto your question. As time goes by, players' contracts will naturally run down and they'll leave (e.g. Robles). Unfortunately, a lot of our overpaid average players are on longer term contracts which means, realistically its going to be couple of years to shift most of the deadwood - unless as stated above, we take a hit and part pay salaries.

The likes of Williams 75k, Klaason 100k, Niasse 55k, Schneirderlin 120k, McCarthy 50k, Sandro 100k and Garbutt 45k will be really hard to shift without part paying something. Can't see us successfully selling any of them near term. We may be able to loan out Williams and at least save some of his wages whilst he runs down his contract but he'll probably be with us this season as we sold Mori and Jags is 36.

Sandro and Klaason are both on 100k/week!! And have YEARS left on their contracts.

McCarthy is one that does my head in. Had one good season in 2013/14 done nothing since. Why we didn't sell him to Celtic a couple of years ago I'll never no. Besic another, also done pretty much nothing in 4 years at the club.

We should really stop giving out really long term contracts. At least do 3 years with 1-2 year extension options. We've bought so many duds recently on huge long term contracts, its ridiculous.

Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.

» Log in now

Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.


About these ads

© ToffeeWeb